The second DLC pack for Final Fantasy 16, The Rising Tide, is officially playable around the world. Compared to its predecessor, Echoes of the Fallen, The Rising Tide promises a longer campaign and new Eikonic powers for Mr. Clive Rosfield to bring into battle. That said, if you’re still early in your journey across…
As we’ve mentioned before in this series, horror threequels, or from any movie genre in fact, are notoriously hard to nail, in terms of quality. So, I won’t dwell for too long about which part threes have historically worked, and which should be pinned to the wall to rot like one of the Creeper’s victims. However, as we all know, dollar signs in the eyes of studio execs can be a dangerous thing, and if there’s a franchise primed and ready to be milked for all it’s worth, just one last time, those suits will make it happen. For better, or worse. Which, my dear fellow gore-hounds, brings us nicely around to a franchise that had much potential for multiple installments; Jeepers Creepers. And, yeah, I know what the title sounds like with my broad Northern England accent, so suck it up, haters. The first movie was a pleasant surprise, with a cool opening scene that paved the way for an equally cool and original villain, to lop off heads and pin corpses to walls and ceilings. The sequel, imaginatively titled Jeepers Creepers 2, followed the first movie a short two years later in 2003 and, as highlighted in our previous episode on the series, was a fun, watchable, but bang average horror flick. So, despite its long gestating development, could Jeepers Creepers 3 (watch it HERE) bring the Creeper back for a kick-ass, gory, all consuming treat with part three? Stay tuned to find out, here on WTF happened to Jeepers Creepers 3.
The great part about the first movie in the Jeepers Creepers series was that after the tension and suspense that was built up in the opening act, the reveal of the antagonist spawned a memorable villain, deserving of some decent movies. Sure, the quality of the opening film may dip slightly once the Creeper is revealed, but its mythology is fairly original and intriguing. The ancient demonic creature feeds upon human beings for twenty three days, every twenty third spring, which seems pretty excessive. Most sensible folk would settle for an all you can eat buffet at their local KFC. The Creeper eats lungs so it can breathe, eyes so it can see and basically whatever it eats, becomes part of it. The first two movies set up a series where the Creeper was positioned front and center, and despite some aforementioned flaws, they were enjoyable in their own right. A third entry should have helped to establish the mythology and provide a continuing springboard for the villain to thrive upon, then? Well, not exactly.
One person who thought a part three would be a good movie, or was at least happy with another steady paycheque, was returning writer / director, Victor Salva. As soon as the second movie was released, to less than favorable reviews, rumors of a potential part three soon began to surface, and it wasn’t too long, 2006 in fact, before it even had a working title; Jeepers Creepers 3: The Creeper Walks Among Us. MGM planned to release it as a DTV title but struggled to find funding. Unfortunately, it would be stuck in development hell until the script was written by Salva with a new absolutely terrifying title; Jeepers Creepers 3: Cathedral and with Gina Phillips returning as ‘Trish’.
The movie was officially given the ghoulish green light to begin filming in early 2016 under Myriad Pictures. However, director Salva’s 1988 conviction for sexual misconduct with a 12 year old, meant that filming in Vancouver B.C. was halted due to talent agencies sending out a warning about his criminal past. The film eventually began production in 2017, this time in Louisiana instead of Vancouver which more closely replicated the Florida setting of the first movie. Alongside the returning Phillips, the cast also included Jonathan Breck who returned as the devilishly handsome Creeper, Stan Shaw as Sheriff Tashtego, Brandon Smith as Sergeant Tubbs, Joyce Giraud and as Deputy Lang. We also get Gabrielle Haugh as Addie plus her Grandmother Gaylen Brandon, played by Meg Foster, who’s son Kenny was killed by the Creeper and appears to his mother in eerie visions she has of him.
The threequel is set between the events of the first and second films in the franchise. The exact time period within the movie is not explicitly stated, but it is established that the story occurs during the Creeper’s feeding cycle, which as we all know by now, happens every twenty three years for twenty three days. The action picks up immediately after the events of the first movie, and tries its best to do something new and interesting with the franchise, to more than mixed results. There’s more emphasis on the Creepers’ previous human slaughtering vacation from twenty years ago, both with the living and supernatural. The main protagonist this time around is Addie who lives with her Grandmother on their struggling farmstead. So, the cast is OK, the premise for the movie is a nice departure from the norm, and with so much potential gory goodness to be found in the Creeper’s past bloodbaths, could part three provide a fun romp for the series.
Unfortunately, the simple answer to that is no. Despite the Creeper again being a worthwhile villain, the rest of the movie is a low point in the franchise. Plot-wise it’s fine but the characterization is lacking any real substance, with Addie moping around and her Grandmother shouting at ghosts that only she can see. We’re also introduced to a kick-ass, seemingly hard as fuck paramilitary task force made up of Creeper survivors, led by Stan Shaw. They all wear matching hats and a shoulder patch, with a cute image of a skull and the creature’s wing. To be fair, a kindergarten class could have come up with a logo more bad-ass than these tough lads did. Their massive truck-mounted chain gun is also ludicrous, but comically awesome.
The movie also attempts to expand the creature’s mythology by making some ‘interesting’ alterations to his rusty ride, bringing it to life with the ability to drive itself and fire off explosives. I know we’re supposed to suspend our disbelief while watching a movie about a lazy arsed creature who can’t be bothered to get his hunt on for over twenty years, but giving him the ability to somehow enchant his vehicle is taking matters a touch too far, surely. Or is it? Let us know in the comments if you think the movie stretches all credibility to its limits or if we should just crack on with the more unbelievable elements. Plots threads are also left unanswered, with much made of an artifact found on Addie’s farm, only for the tantalizing promise of it perhaps having an effect on the Creeper never being fully explained. It’s a shame that we also never get a rousing climax, or a final battle with the Creeper, which I guess was the idea, to set up the events for the second movie. But, it’s very anticlimactic for no good reason.
Jeepers Creepers 3 had a limited two day release in theaters; once on September 26th, 2017 and also an encore event where it was screened again on October 4th. The movie grossed $2.3 million dollars in the US and $1.7 million dollars in other territories; making a worldwide total of $4 million dollars. It was the third biggest movie at the box-office on September 26th, behind Kingsman: The Golden Circle and It. The film was also released on DVD and Blu-ray on December 26th, 2017.
While this limited release was in contrast to the admittedly superior first two parts, what was the critical reaction? Dread Central, who’s reviews are generally fair and well balanced gave the movie a generous three and a half stars out of five, saying, “at the end of the day if you’re a fan of the franchise, you’ll be happy with this latest entry… which for my tastes is better than the second but just falls short of the goodness and quality of the original experience”. Less favorable were IGN who said the movie was, “an unremarkable entry in a cult favorite franchise, Jeepers Creepers 3 offers fans too little to get excited about. While the monster still rules its slice of country highway and the skies above it, the rest of the film crashes in the cornfields”.
So, my wonderfully twisted fellow gore-hounds, what we have here is a threequel that doesn’t live up to the promise of the first two movies, but at least tries something fresh with the franchise. It may have been the last movie in the series that Victor Salva had any involvement with, despite having a treatment in place for part four, but that hasn’t stopped a reboot from emerging in 2022, called Jeepers Creepers: Reborn. There’s an entirely new production on board for what they consider to be a “restart” for the franchise. So, stay tuned to our channel to see if the reboot is a strong new beginning for the Creeper, or if he should have stayed in his lazy slumber for a little longer. More importantly though, what’s YOUR take on part three? Let us know in the comments and we’ll see you wonderful gore-hounds next time. Thanks for watching!
A couple of the previous episodes of WTF Happened to This Horror Movie? can be seen below. To see more, head over to our JoBlo Horror Originals YouTube channel – and subscribe while you’re there!
The post Jeepers Creepers 3 (2017) – WTF Happened to This Horror Movie? appeared first on JoBlo.
Originally released in 1999, Final Fantasy VIII may not have gone on to enjoy the critical acclaim of its predecessor, that being the one and only Final Fantasy 7, but it’s certainly earned its place in the hearts of many a Final Fantasy fan.
Originally released in 1999, Final Fantasy VIII may not have gone on to enjoy the critical acclaim of its predecessor, that being the one and only Final Fantasy 7, but it’s certainly earned its place in the hearts of many a Final Fantasy fan.
Larian Studios may not be making Baldur’s Gate 4 and Hasbro is talking with new partners about the series’ future, but Baldur’s Gate 3 still has some juice left in it. The development team has released some new information about the game’s big Patch 7, and it sounds like it will be another substantial update with new…
Larian Studios may not be making Baldur’s Gate 4 and Hasbro is talking with new partners about the series’ future, but Baldur’s Gate 3 still has some juice left in it. The development team has released some new information about the game’s big Patch 7, and it sounds like it will be another substantial update with new…
Many things about the movie Civil War are meant to be incendiary. The very concept of the movie, which has been released during an election year when the political culture could seemingly mirror the extreme reality of the film, is enough to make a general movie goer feel uneasy. There is dynamic imagery in the trailers that showcase American cities in peril, and although that can be seen in almost any high-budget action movie, these sequences hit differently. However, with everything that Civil War does to illicit an uncomfortable response from an audience, a controversy has recently come from the less likely place — the way they made their marketing.
The Hollywood Reporter has revealed that a new ad campaign for the movie has been getting a lot of negative attention online. Civil War has released five new posters that aim to depict some haunting situations of American cities in shambles due to the war. However, these posters have been called out for having something off about them. They were made using AI. The posters in question were posted on the film’s Instagram and some were displayed as prints. A source explained, “These are AI images inspired by the movie. The entire movie is a big ‘what if’ and so we wanted to continue that thought on social — powerful imagery of iconic landmarks with that dystopian realism.”
AI is an immensely hot-button topic right now. While many wondrous things can be generated by these programs, there still lies an unsettling uncanny valley effect to whatever has been made. Some productions have experimented with it for its feeling of abstract like the title sequences for Marvel’s Secret Invasion and Late Night with the Devil. Both of these projects have come under fire for using AI instead of artists. And Civil War is also getting caught in the crossfire.
One person online had responded to the images, saying, “You know DAMN well how the film community feels about the use of AI Generated content. And the backlash [to AI generated stills featured in the horror film] Late Night With The Devil was more than enough to make that transparently clear to everyone: WE DO NOT WANT THIS. How stupid of your marketing team to even think this was acceptable. We are trying our hardest to fight against the push of opening Pandora’s Box with this shit and here you are willfully ignoring everyone’s concerns in that matter.”
The post Civil War posters made from AI cause a controversy appeared first on JoBlo.
Two highly anticipated films are released this weekend: Radio Silence’s Abigail and Guy Ritchie’s The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. However, the release pattern for the latter is highly unusual, with Ritchie’s big-budget war epic only getting a theatrical release in the United States, skipping theaters in Canada and the UK in favor of an exclusive run on Prime Video later. As such, it’s not expected to make much of a dent at the weekend box office, with it looking like Abigail will pull off an easy win.
Currently, we’re predicting Abigail will make about $20 million. That’s much less than what Radio Silence pulled off with the Scream films. Remember, though, that this is an original horror title with a twist on classic vampire folklore. So far, the reviews have been mixed, with our man, Mike Conway, loving it, while others have accused it of being a tad goofy. Even still, it looks like a fun horror outing in the vein of the directing duo’s last original title, Ready or Not. It’ll be interesting to see what the CinemaScore on this is, with the hot cast, including ex-Scream star Melissa Barrera, Kathryn Newton, and Dan Stevens, which is likely a draw.
Second place should go to Alex Garland’s Civil War, which many folks think will be rather front-loaded. It should make about $12 million for a final tally in the $60 million-ish run, which should make this pretty profitable for A24 once foreign box office and digital profits are tallied up. The CinemaScore is B minus, which suggests its polarizing audiences, which isn’t too much of a surprise given how controversial it is.
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare looks to open in the $10 million-ish range. That seems very low for the Henry Cavill-led war flick, but the release strategy is weird. If it’s not opening in Canada, its chances of really over-performing are limited. Thus this might be another Guy Ritchie movie that ends up being more popular on streaming than in theatres. What a shame. As a Canadian, I’d like nothing better than to plunk down my 20 bucks to see this in theaters this weekend, but it’s not to be. Heck, there’s even a chance this could be outgrossed by CrunchyRoll’s Spy Code x Family: White, which should make at least $6 million. It’s hard to tell with this anime film.
Here are our predictions for the weekend:
The post Box Office Predictions: Radio Silence’s Abigail could drain the life from The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare appeared first on JoBlo.
Napoleon may have lost at Waterloo, but Joaquin Phoenix has lost to Brian Cox. Cox – who has been no stranger to speaking his mind on just about any topic that irks him – has now targeted Ridley Scott’s Napoleon, particularly calling out the lead performance of Joaquin Phoenix. Go on, Brian, give ‘em the “Logan Roy” – you know what we’re talking about!
Speaking at HistFest in London (via The Standard), Brian Cox lashed out at Napoleon, saying it was “Terrible. It’s terrible. A truly terrible performance by Joaquin Phoenix. It really is appalling. I don’t know what he was thinking. I think it’s totally his fault and I don’t think Ridley Scott helps him. I would have played it a lot better than Joaquin Phoenix, I tell you that. You can say it’s good drama. No – it’s lies.” Cox would go on to take yet another swipe at method acting – something Phoenix has experimented with – by saying, “That’s all bollocks. It’s a kind of nonsense. We’re transmitters. That’s what we are as actors. We transmit energy.” While there was evidently no “energy” in Phoenix’s interpretation of Napoleon Bonaparte, Cox did at least have some fun with his unique name. “I think he’s well named. Joaquin…whackeen… whacky. It’s a sort of whacky performance.”
Brian Cox would go on to blast another historical epic, Braveheart. While he praised Mel Gibson – a curious choice not to call “wacky”… – he called the movie “a load of lies. He never impregnated the French princess. It is a bollocks [sic] that film.” So who’s brave enough to tell Cox about all of the historical inaccuracies in Troy?
Brian Cox is a particularly cantankerous dude overall it seems, but this is really something. He has every right to put any fellow actor to task, but to say he would do better in the role – presumably decades prior, although maybe Cox legitimately thinks he could have nailed the part at 77 – is at another level. Call it arrogance or just not being hip to Phoenix’s style, but the man is not having any of it. Of note, Brian Cox and Joaquin Phoenix share credit on Spike Jonze’s Her, although the former only has a voice role.
What do you think of Brian Cox’s comments about Joaquin Phoenix and Napoleon?
The post Brian Cox calls Joaquin Phoenix’s Napoleon performance “terrible” and “wacky” appeared first on JoBlo.
The Movie Critic was set to be the tenth and final film from Quentin Tarantino, but according to Deadline, the director has decided to scrap the movie and start from scratch. That’s some shocking news.
It was expected that production on The Movie Critic would have gotten underway later this year, but the report states that Tarantino had recently rewritten the script, which caused a delay. This gave him time to think about what he truly wanted to be his final work, and apparently, that’s not The Movie Critic. Deadline said that Tarantino “simply changed his mind.“
We never really knew all that much about The Movie Critic, only that it would be set in California in 1977 and would be “based on a guy who really lived, but was never really famous, and he used to write movie reviews for a porno rag.” When Tarantino was a teenager, he had a job loading porn magazines into a vending machine. “All the other stuff was too skanky to read, but then there was this porno rag that had a really interesting movie page,” Tarantino said. “He wrote about mainstream movies and he was the second-string critic. I think he was a very good critic. He was as cynical as hell. His reviews were a cross between early Howard Stern and what Travis Bickle might be if he were a film critic.“
The film was reportedly set to star Brad Pitt, with some saying that the actor would be reprising his role as stuntman Cliff Booth from Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
While it comes as a big shock for Tarantino to scrap The Movie Critic at this stage, it’s not the first time he’s done it. After his script for The Hateful Eight was leaked, he decided to abandon the project and release it as a novel instead. Of course, he did eventually reconsider and the film was released in 2015. It’s possible the same thing could happen with The Movie Critic, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he did move on to something new this time. But perhaps we could see The Movie Critic released as a novel somewhere down the road.
Tarantino has had no shortage of projects that could have served as his final movie, including an R-rated Star Trek film and Kill Bill Vol. 3.
Now that The Movie Critic is off the table, what do you hope Quentin Tarantino does for his final film?
The post Quentin Tarantino scraps The Movie Critic as his tenth and final film appeared first on JoBlo.